Homelessness in Canada - Case Study Example

Homelessness in Canada Homelessness in Canada Canada, a prosperous country with a population of 30 million has fared exceptionally well in even the most testing of economic times. While rapid urbanization helped 80% of it population to reside in urban center of development and growth, the country faces a severe mass crisis at hand, homelessness. Homelessness is defined as the inability of an individual to acquire a permanent housing due to several barriers like lack of funds, mental physical disability; discrimination etc. not having a permanent shelter to live under is entirely negative for societies and individuals and can lead to adverse effects like stress, crimes, societal uproar etc. The problem of homelessness is attributed to the change in the Canadian government’s economic policies which resulted in less affordable housing and lack of support for low income segment. There is no denying the fact that a section of Canada’s population has always lived under poverty. However, since poverty lead to stress, crimes and addiction in its entirety, coupling it with homelessness has led to the spread of this problem into a country wide crisis. Even though the Canadian government has taken several steps to tackle this problem, it persists in the country. This paper will shed light on the government’s inadequate measures to eradicate the problem of homelessness, its implications and remedial measures. “Canadian Government should take adequate measures to effectively do away with the crisis of homelessness” Homelessness reflects a society’s inability to provide equal housing opportunities to the masses. It also reflects the growing income gap and disparity between the rich and poor. The problem gained momentum in the 1980’s and worsened in the 90s. Strategic adjustments made to the economic policies in the wake of globalization, trade liberalization and deindustrialization had a positive effect on the economy but it also fueled the fire of homelessness. Wealth accumulated in the hands of the richer and the poor belonging to low income segments were denied their basic rights to reasonable housing. Social spending was decreased as a result of revamped economic policies bringing down the investment in housing schemes and thus, housing became unaffordable and even relief activities for the homeless were also affected by this. Income patterns were also altered greatly as consensus data showed that increase in wealth was only indicated in the higher income segments of the masses. The middle class and lower income groups suffered decline in the wages and decreased benefits. The decline in government spending on low income Canadians also led to a decrease in the standard of living of the people as the total investment on health education and social welfare was cut down. Even though affordable housing on rent existed in the society, the vulnerability of the people to homelessness increased greatly. As a result, homelessness became widespread and obvious with people taking refuge in public places, parks and streets. When the apparent problem was covered by the media and protested against by the general masses the government launched emergency measures to tackle homelessness and provide relief to the people deprived of a personal space to live in. these emergency policies were aimed at providing the homeless relief but the government fast realized that it alone was not enough. Thus, this strategy took a paradigm shift and the purpose of provision of relief was replaced by preventive measures. Through this, the government looked into the causing factors of homelessness and formulated policies to hamper those factors for example, inadequate income, high cost of living, weak welfare system, expensive housing etc. However, the fact remains that homelessness prevails in Canada on a large scale and he government’s efforts are not enough to tackle its root cause. According to a report by Homelessness Partnering Secretariat (HPS) in 2013, 300,000 people in Canada remain homeless in the given year (Gaetz, 2013). Emergency measures to tackle the issue costs the government $7.05 billion dollars annually. Speculations have said that these costs could be much lower if the government invested in proviso of affordable housing schemes instead of in emergency relief remedies. The Segeart study(2012) shows that youth constitute 20% of these homeless people. This is an alarming statistic for a country that aims at becoming a prosperous center of development and economic growth. Apart from wastage of an effective resource with a longer productivity life cycle, these youth are vulnerable to societal chaos as they can resort to crimes in order to keep themselves provided for. They are also susceptible for malnutrition as they are bound to suffer from stress that leads to low or no income avenue for them and ultimately makes them dependent for meals. The reason why government’s measure have not yielded effective positive results as yet is because the key reason that cause this problem have not been eliminated from the system. Affordable housing schemes have not been provided nor have the income and social support system improved. Some recommendations to tackle the problem at hand are: Clarity of plans to eliminate homelessness at provincial and national level A time based plan to eradicate homelessness should be in effect and its strategic goals should be communicated to provinces at their level as well. Since the causing factors like education, health, nutrition, judiciary etc. can be controlled at a communal level as well. These communities should be supported by the government and achievement of this time bound goals should be made a priority. Embracing housing scheme provision as the priority Instead of focusing resources on the emergency measures to tackle homelessness and providing homeless people with adequate relief, the government should focus on making investment in the housing schemes and ensuring that the people can afford a permanent shelter as a basic necessity. Apart from this, rental subsidies should also be a part of a a national housing strategy with tax exemptions for re-housing homeless people. Prioritizing category of homelessness Chronic and episodic victims of homelessness are the worst of in terms of outcomes. This is because they suffer from prolonged homelessness and are vulnerable to poorer health, malnutrition, drug abuse etc. they also become dependent on the emergency services for their livelihood and can suffer from mental and physical ailments in the long run that can permanently affect their productivity. These homeless people should be made a priority as they are the worst case of the homeless phenomenon and also constitute of the highest expenditure segment of the emergency services. Aboriginal Homelessness refers to homelessness that can be attributed to homelessness that is a result of discrimination on the basis of physical, mental or ethical differences. These are also important segments that should be protected and safeguarded by the emergency programs. In this era of globalization, protection of rights of the minorities plays an important role in creating a feasible environment for global business. Performance evaluation and monitoring of policies in place With significant funds being put in the homelessness eradication, there is a dire need for effective measure to monitor the effectiveness and success of the allocation of funds. The performance of the emergency programs and setups should also be made an integral part of the system as wrongful allocation can be detected and corrected immediately instead of wastage of resources. In conclusion, homelessness has taken the form of a national disaster in these times. It was a result of structural policy changes and in order to eradicate this problem, these policies have to be amended with an immediate effect. Commitment towards provision of basic rights to all Canadians should be made a priority with an emphasis on adequate housing schemes as reliance on emergency services will not help in eradicating the problem and will prolong it adding to the hefty expenditures incurred by hen government to do away with homelessness (Gaetz, 2010). References: Segaert, A. (2012) The National Shelter Study: Emergency shelter Use in Canada 2005-2009. Ottawa: Homelessness Partnering Secretariat, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. Gaetz, S. A. (2013). The state of homelessness in Canada 2013. Toronto, Ont.: Homeless Hub. Gaetz, S. (2010). The struggle to end homelessness in canada: how we created the crisis, and how we can end it. The Open Health Services And Policy Journal, 3 pp. 21--26. Read More